Reply #97: The point is, it provides an explanation that is plausible...

[MercutioATC]

...that's the key. Plausibile.

Planting plane parts, firing missiles, replacing four commercial planes in flight, organizing the controlled demolition of multiple buildings...these things just aren't plausible, especially when you try to include them all at the same time.

The point of my link about the plane parts at the Pentagon was that, whether you choose to believe it or not, there IS a factual explanation for the size of the engine parts that were found and they could well be from the high-pressure stage of a 757 engine. That's at least as much "evidence" as exists for the "F-16" or "Global Hawk" claims.

You're right that it's just one piece of evidence. It, alone, didn't convince me. What did was the damage on the ground along the 757's approach path (the lightpoles, etc) and the numerous eyewitness reports claiming to have seen a large commercial plane. Other eyewitness reports dealt with the lack of debris at the crash site, explaining how small pieces of the plane had rained down on their cars on the highway. My point is that there are numerous pieces of data that all add up to the same conclusion: a 757 crashed into the Pentagon.